Why can't we just get away from all these bans on Aero development, gearboxes and engine caps, etc etc.
Make it a simple rule: The minimum weight of a car will be defined as 540kg plus 1kg for every EUR1m the team spends during that rolling year.
Teams can then go ans spend whatever the hell they want. If they think they can make a car competive by spending EUR400m, but which would require them to use a 940kg car - where we all know the fuel burn at a rate of 3kg per lap is worth about 0.3s/lap on most circuits - ie, it's a 0.1s/lap penalty per kg, then so be it.

Teams would very quickly find a balance performance and what they're willing to spend on development.

interesting raven, though surely all the expenses could just be laundered, so
a design company did X amount of aero development as a complimentary gift, just as a ferrari employee gave his 'friend' at the wind tunnel a gift of several million. lolz

An FIA Technical Report on Sunday morning in Hockenheim has thrown the cat amongst the pigeons in F1 circles. The FIA Technical Delegate Jo Bauer reported that “having examinded the engine torque map of cars 1 and 2 it became apparent that the maximum torque output of both engines is significantly less in the mid rpm range than previously seen for these engines at other events”.

He went on “in my opinion this is therefore in breach of Article 5.5.3 of the Technical regulations as the engines are able to deliver more torque at a given engine speed in the mid rpm range. Furthermore this new torque map will artificially alter the aerodynamic characteristics of both cars which is also in contravention of TD 036-11.”

It is not clear what TD 036-11 is but one presumes it is a technical directive, or clarification.

Article 5.5.3 states that “The maximum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or greater than the maximum engine torque at the measured engine speed. The minimum accelerator pedal travel position must correspond to an engine torque demand equal to or lower than 0Nm.”

interesting raven, though surely all the expenses could just be laundered, so
a design company did X amount of aero development as a complimentary gift, just as a ferrari employee gave his 'friend' at the wind tunnel a gift of several million. lolz

So just have independent valuations. Put in a rule that if I can't go out and buy whatever product or service for the same price they're claiming, they can't claim that price.
ie, it includes income from sponsorship.

Red Bull will not be penalised over their engine torque maps ahead of the German Grand Prix.

This article will be updated.

Good point raven. Would be cool. I liked A1GP for the fact that it was a spec chassis so the teams all had the same setup options to play with, made it a more even playing field for the drivers. but A1GP aint around no more :<

I tend to agree they should be able to share and sell R&D, but on the proviso that anything sold can be purchased by any team at the same price.
Otherwise you'll end up with McLaren and Ferrari selling some fancy aero system to each other for $1, and charging $80m if STR want it.

I also believe the FIA should standardise the floors, front and rear wings.
I wouldn't be averse to them homologating the bodywork either. Back in the day, F1 development was supposed to promote road innovation. So much of what goes in to F1 no longer relates to road cars - it's money spent for the purpose of racing. That's not what F1 was supposed to be about. If what they're spending money on doesn't have a benefit to the automotive industry, it shouldn't be money needed to be spent.